El esquema de la representación mediática

Extension Methods

Methods have been an important extension tool for communicating with, educating and involving its clientele. According to the diffusion of innovations approach, extension methods are the means of informing, teaching and persuading

farmers to innovate. Individual-based methods are the most common, mainly to inform, persuade and reinforce farmers' decisions to adopt (Rogers, 1983; Ban et al, 1988). This method normally consists of contacts and farm visits, but it can also involve farmers' visits to the extension office, letters and phone calls. It is considered particularly useful for extension

agents to build up friendship with farmers and gain their confidence, although this restricts coverage. Generally, it is used via 'opinion l e a d e r s ’ and 'progressive farmers' (Ban et al, 1988; Saville, 1965).

Media-based methods, such as newspapers, film and radio are seen as useful for informing a large audience about an innovation with relative speed. They are assumed to be relevant for changing weakly held attitudes and more relevant for earlier adopters and opinion leaders, and for creating general awareness and interest in new ideas (Saville, 1965; Ban et al, 1988) . Group methods, such as meetings, speeches or talks, demonstrations, group discussions, farm visits and excursions, are seen as being useful for diffusing new ideas, for they bring farmers together for meetings and group discussions. They also facilitate communication, feed-back and interaction among farmers themselves (Ban et al, 1988; Chambers et al, 1989). Demonstrations are believed to be useful for the persuasion stage, and favour attitude changes by allowing farmers to learn by doing, and extension to teach farmers how to implement an innovation (Saville, 1965; Ban et all, 1988; Chambers et al, 1989).

Conversely, participatory approaches use extension methods as a means of facilitating the process of involvement and group development. As such, great emphasis is placed on group methods such as group meetings and discussions, which are seen as a medium for getting people involved and creating self- awareness. Meetings are perceived as a forum for promoting solidarity, cohesion and unity of action, and serve as a basis for building more formal organizational structures. Great emphasis is attached to analytical tools, data collection,

problem identification, diagnosis and identification of appropriate solutions and evaluation, jointly with extensionists and researchers. Such techniques are adopted by participatory approaches such as PRA, PAR, and PALM approaches and led by the Farmer-Led Extension approach. Extensionists are expected to conduct group meetings by creating an atmosphere of fraternity, informality and dialogue, where agents and group members can talk as equals. Group meetings are structured relatively loosely and discussions tend to be encouraged, so that people can participate freely. This also prevents extension agents from dominating the farmers' groups (Chambers, 1989; Oakley, 1991; Thomas-Slayter, 1995; Garforth and Harford, 1997) .

Participatory farmers extension usually employs workshops, seminars and courses which tend to emphasize reflection over peoples' needs, analysis of their problems and the organizing of some form of action (Hall, 1988; Oakley, 1991). People are invited to define topics of interest and programmes, including the sharing of experiences and analysis of participants' situations. Inter-group or project learning activities are also promoted through seminars and short visits, which can provide new ideas to group members. It is believed that such techniques can ameliorate f a r m e r s ' general lack of information caused by isolation (Chambers, 1989). Other methodological initiatives are popular theatre, songs and Bible circles, which are commonly used in Latin America. Other means, such as video, puppetry, and slides are widely spread and permit people's self expression and exchange of information among groups, and focus analysis and discussion on specific problems (Oxfam, 1985; Oakley, 1991; Scarborough, 1997) .

Women and Extension

Diffusionist extension saw women primarily according to their reproductive and productive roles. Initially, in the 1950s and 1960s, it focused on women only as being responsible for child-rearing thus, with the aim of making them better mothers, through training in home economics and nutrition.

During the 1970s when the weakness of the diffusion-of- innovation and modernization approaches for confronting underdevelopment became apparent, the diffusionist extension mode also recognized the productive role of women as income earners and as a means of overcoming underdevelopment. During the 1980s it continued to focus on women's participation in production as a mean of contributing economically to development and to their equity in relation to men. Diffusionist extension only recognized the practical needs of women, namely their biological needs and interests, related mainly to child-rearing, including the provision of housing and basic services such as food, shelter and water.

In contrast, participatory extension is concerned with women's equity or rather their unequal situation of subordination to men. It assumed that to gain equity for women in development, they should participate actively in the development process. Thus, it recognizes the role of women in the community, which includes undertaking work for the provision of housing and basic services, and their community leadership role, which in general is the domain of men. It was also concerned with the strategic needs of women with the aim of freeing women from the burden of domestic labour and childcare, and providing them with greater autonomy as a mean of achieving equity in relation to men. From the 1980s,

participatory extension promoted women's self-reliance and empowerment by encouraging bottom-up mobilization through participation in party politics and trade unionism as a mean of confronting oppression (Moser, 1989). Thus, it has motivated women to take part in organizations and to participate in all types of projects and activities, as in the VACVINA organization in Vietnam, in horticulture activities, and in India, in animal husbandry and forestry, which include women as extension volunteers (EVs) (Selener, 1997).

Extension Topics

The diffusion-of-innovations approach emphasises science and modern technology as the means for farmers to increase production and home administration. Initially, agricultural production embraced topics such as crop production, forestry, marketing, credit and cooperatives and included subjects on new technology, relating to seeds, fertilizers, machinery and storage systems. The implications of the market and the agro­ industrial complex in farmers' income, has forced extension to embrace subjects such as farm management and farm economics. Home administration was concerned mainly with improving families' housing, health, nutrition, education and home economics (Brunner et al, 1949; Ribeiro, 1985).

Participatory extension approaches deal with similar topics, but with different objectives, which reflect on the content. That is, participatory extension emphasises transferring principles, methods and a basket of choices that can be adapted to local situations, whilst the diffusionist approach is tied to a package of technologies that are assumed to be useful for all types of farmers, conveying standardised

messages and regulating practices. The latter aim at achieving uniform infrastructures, whilst the former aims at developing diverse capabilities that can increase sustainability in terms of social, economic and environmental aspects.

Thus, it emphasises the use of local resources, indigenous and appropriate knowledge while the diffusionist strategy emphasises imported and capital-intensive technology. Participatory approaches are holistic, for they take into account social, political, economic, and institutional aspects, among others, whilst the diffusionist approach is considered reductionist, since it stresses economic and technological aspects (Chambers, 1983, 1889, 1997). These topics are considered primarily as tools for households to achieve their goals, including that of empowerment (Friedmann, 1992).

Projects comprise an important vehicle for promoting development. Two types of projects can be distinguished: large scale projects or programmes and small scale projects. The first type are government-sponsored programmes that normally cover large areas as in the case of Intergrated Rural Development Programmes (IRDP). They are multi-sectoral and involve all the institutional, financial and material resources, necessary to tackle an identified problem. In general, they centralize decision-making in relation to funding and planning; learning is not emphasised; technology is capital intensive and imported, they have bureaucratic management, and are inflexible (Chambers, 1983, 1989; Friedmann, 1992). In addition, it is said that they create dependence, which makes projects vulnerable to changes in external circumstances

Small projects normally address social and economic development, involve the poorest farmers, emphasise learning, use appropriate and indigenous technology, foster participation in planning and collective action with the aim of empowering people. They are more likely to facilitates control b y the beneficiaries, avoid bureaucratization and diminish costs. Small scale projects comprise the features advocated b y the participatory extension and consist of alternatives to promote the reversals that development work requires to benefit the poor (Midgley and Hall, 1986; Chambers, 1983, 1989; Friedmann,

1992). Hopes that the benefits of small projects might spread among the poor reside on the proliferation of participatory extension organizations and on networks which may lead to influencing state policies (Friedmann, 1992).

Assessment of Participation

Despite some progress during the last two decades, the l i t e r a t u r e and practice on the evaluation of p a r t i c i p a t i o n on d e v e l o p m e n t is still limited. In general both quali t a t i v e and q u a n t i t a t i v e evidence are essential and complementary. In addition, the intangible goals of participation, such as a w a r e n e s s - r a i s i n g and material attainments, are m u t u a l l y i nter-dependent. Consequently, the achievement of one type of goal is e x p e c t e d to lead to the a c c omplishment of another. For example, increasing political power is e x p e c t e d to facilitate producers to achieve their basic needs such as housing, food and water, which in turn, empowers producers (Cohen and Uphoff, 1980; Cow and Vansant, 1983; Bhasin, 1985; Moser, 1983; M i g dley and Hall, 1986; M a r s d e n et al, 1991; Oakley, 1991) . This study adopts this view and examines both

the tangible and less obvious goals of p a r t i c i p a t o r y d e v e l o p m e n t .